Mass Control 2.0 on Ebay

I just read the thread about Ebay shafting sellers in 2009. That is a timely post for me and I don't want to lose out because of Ebay.

I purchased Mass Control 2.0 when it launched and because of time and financial constraints, I have decided that I would like try to sell it on Ebay. Hopefully there are people who are still interested in buying it.

I don't know all of the rules and guidelines on the best way to do this--like do you start low and hope the bidding will go up high enough or do you start it at the lowest amount you are willing to accept? Of course, I would like to recoup as much of the cost as possible.

No real suggestions to get around the "eBay screw"... all I can do is wish you well on your auction.

Maybe someone here will buy it from you... there are lots of folks here that mentioned getting their hands on it when it launches again... you might wanna wait a week or so before you put it up on eBay.

You may be better asking your question on the ebay forums. I'd also check the TOS of reselling the product from the original vendor as well

Good luck
Kim

Originally Posted by TerrieS

Hello Warriors,

I just read the thread about Ebay shafting sellers in 2009. That is a timely post for me and I don't want to lose out because of Ebay.

I purchased Mass Control 2.0 when it launched and because of time and financial constraints, I have decided that I would like try to sell it on Ebay. Hopefully there are people who are still interested in buying it.

I don't know all of the rules and guidelines on the best way to do this--like do you start low and hope the bidding will go up high enough or do you start it at the lowest amount you are willing to accept? Of course, I would like to recoup as much of the cost as possible.

Before putting a high-ticket item on ebay, I would sell some lower-priced items first, both to learn how it works and to build up some feedback. If your feedback is zero and you're selling $1000+ item, many people won't buy since that looks suspicious.

Be careful with that tactic. If you buy a few low-priced items, then turn around and start listing things for sale, Ebay may mistake it as "feedback manipulation" and suspend your account, cancelling your auctions in the process. I've had it happen to me before, not the least bit fun trying to get your account back.

edit: On the subject of refunds.. I can see both sides of that argument. If I bought something I knew I couldn't afford, of course it would be irresponsible and unethical for me to ask for a refund. But what if I ran into circumstances that I couldn't have possibly predicted? And if the seller is offering a no questions asked refund, then any buyer is well within their rights to return the product and get their money back. As far as me personally, I'm far from a "serial refunder", there's only been one time I ever asked for a refund and the whole experience caused me to gain a lot of respect for a marketing "guru" who I don't even really know (other than through his products). I might as well tell the story...

A few years back, a well-known marketing "guru" who I'll refer to here as M. launched a high-ticket product named after a certain winged insect and a popular movie of the time. I ordered it, and at the time could easily afford it and would have been able to put it into action almost immediately. Unfortunately there was a shipping delay, and while I was waiting for my product to be shipped, my health and financial situation took a turn for the worse (for those who must know, I was diagnosed with cancer). I explained my situation to M. through his private members-only forum. I was issued a full and immediate refund. Not only that, I asked M. to remove me from his private forum since I was no longer his customer. He invited me to stay, soak up whatever knowledge I could and share and contribute whatever I could. To this day I rarely visit that forum, but I'm still a member there and still very thankful to M. for inviting me to stay. Mostly because of the way he handled the situation, and because of the results I've seen from other people who have used his product, I will most definitely be purchasing it when he relaunches the new version (and thankfully, at a much lower price) and I'll continue to do business with him in the future. He may have lost a $1000+ sale but he gained a life-long customer. Which one is more valuable?

Be careful with that tactic. If you buy a few low-priced items, then turn around and start listing things for sale, Ebay may mistake it as "feedback manipulation" and suspend your account, cancelling your auctions in the process. I've had it happen to me before, not the least bit fun trying to get your account back.

That shows the stupidity of ebay, then.

Unless you are running some conspiracy, there is no such thing as "feedback manipulation" - ebay is the one that came up with feedback in the first place, so this is a ridiculous concept.

Dude ... havent ya heard? Ebay is ridiculous now. Not like the good old days. Lots of scammers and of course gotta perform a little song and dance for the shareholders dontcha know. Their corp governance is soooo over the top and their Gestappo tactics are just plain crazed.

There is no logic at all with them - they grew too fast and too big for their own good.

They just had to go public ... If they could just buy back all their public shares - it might be a great place to trade once again.

Originally Posted by Chris Lockwood

That shows the stupidity of ebay, then.

Unless you are running some conspiracy, there is no such thing as "feedback manipulation" - ebay is the one that came up with feedback in the first place, so this is a ridiculous concept.

Unless you are running some conspiracy, there is no such thing as "feedback manipulation" - ebay is the one that came up with feedback in the first place, so this is a ridiculous concept.

It's just common sense that you would start with lower-priced items.

What makes it worse is the fact that in low-price auctions that they consider "feedback manipulation" it's almost always the buyer who gets punished for it, not the seller. I thought the whole point of Ebay from a buyer's perspective is to try to get the best price you can for whatever it is you want to buy. If Ebay feels the prices is too low and it's a form of "feedback manipulation" then doesn't it make sense that setting the minimum bid/buy now price is the seller's responsibility and not the buyer's?

Unfortunately that argument didn't work too well for me when Ebay hit me with the "feedback manipulation" thing a little over a year ago. They didn't want to hear anything about the seller (who is paying fees to list their auctions) being responsible for setting the prices, I was the "cheat" and that's all there was to it. It didn't matter that I was buying things that I actually intended to use or resell, or that the sellers were the ones listing them for ridiculously cheap prices. I don't even want to go into all the hoops I had to jump through to finally get my account back, it was ridiculous and even though I did get my account back I haven't done any business on Ebay (and only the occasional PayPal transaction) since then.

I hope you had a great weekend. If possible before you make the decision to sell the item would it be worth trying to get through another segment or two (if not more)? There could be information that you get to early on in the course that may be useful at a later date when the time allows.

As for the selling of the item. Decide what the lowest price including shipping, insurance, and postage you would be content with. Make sure only you know the answer. To protect yourself since it is a one of a kind item the priority mail will give you best service, insurance protects you from it being lost in the post office, and delivery confirmation gives you proof the customer received it. Have the outside of the shipping envelope marked "Fragile." Is it possible that the Warrior Forum would be a better road to travel than EBAY?

The reselling we're talking about here isn't like having PLR or
MRR... she purchased a physical product.. no different than a
car or color TV. She's now done with it. She has every right
to sell that physical product.

I would think your best approach is to take Kern up on his refund offer. Using eBay is not that difficult and you have a physical product so you can sell it, BUT as some have pointed out you may take a big hit on what you will get for it.

DonDavis had a good suggestion. You have already made known your desire to sell it in this thread. Wait a few days and see if you get some offers or a PM.

I do not have any complaints about the product, so I don't feel good about returning it because my situation has changed. A few people have PM'd me with questions, so I'm going to wait and see how that turns out before I do anything. Unless I hear otherwise, I am going with "It's a physical product and I can sell it if I want."

Are you serious? Why would you feel bad about taking the full refund? Most of those refunds read that you can refund for any reason. Trust me, these guys wouldn't give you the same type of consideration.

Are you serious? Why would you feel bad about taking the full refund? Most of those refunds read that you can refund for any reason. Trust me, these guys wouldn't give you the same type of consideration.

Davebo, are you serious?

The lady is saying she's happy with the product and she feels it would be unethical to ask for a refund.

Like many people, I have bought products I am not using. That's my fault, not the sellers'. I have asked for a refund only 3 times in 3 years because the products were either crap or the sales page misleading.

Encouraging someone to ask for a refund because they don't have time to use the product or are strapped for cash is not the Warrior Way.

I hope Frank Kern comes in here and makes her an offer to show people how a gentleman behaves and really rub it in.

The lady is saying she's happy with the product and she feels it would be unethical to ask for a refund.

Like many people, I have bought products I am not using. That's my fault, not the sellers'. I have asked for a refund only 3 times in 3 years because the products were either crap or the sales page misleading.

Encouraging someone to ask for a refund because they don't have time to use the product or are strapped for cash is not the Warrior Way.

I hope Frank Kern comes in here and makes her an offer to show people how a gentleman behaves and really rub it in.

Martin

Now there's the kind of guy I like to do biz with. Someone who actually owns up to their end of the bargain.

It isn't unethical to return something per the return policy. It doesn't mean there is anything wrong with what she is doing...I applaud her for it. However, I don't think anyone thinks she shouldn't stand up for her own ideas of morality. The issues arose when the labels started getting thrown around.

We're all adults here and refunds are the price of doing business. Hell, just ask Radio Shack. They'll let you return just about anything as long as you got some tape and the original packaging.

As a marketer, it sucks to have a product returned, but it is going to happen. Since when did everything come 2nd after the almighty dollar?

So you'd never return an item that you couldn't afford to a retail store?

Let's say you bought some furniture because the salesman had a good pitch. They deliver it to your house and you realize that maybe you made a bad decision. Would you feel bad about returning the furniture?

Let's say you bought some furniture because the salesman had a good pitch. They deliver it to your house and you realize that maybe you made a bad decision. Would you feel bad about returning the furniture?

Trust me... I see your point. And, to answer your question--no--I would not feel bad for the salesperson, for returning the furniture at all. I would be ashamed of myself for making an ill-advised decision and misusing a refund policy to bail myself out.

Most people are just reacting this way because it's frank kern. If it were some other putz marketer, they'd say that he should be prepared for any refund if that's what the terms were.

I think the people in this thread need to learn what "unethical" actually means.

I think you hit the nail on the head.

I also think, if this had been Joe Nobody's $2000 course, the same people who are saying it is unethical to ask for a refund would be saying Joe's course must be crap if the lady could not use it to earn back her $2000.

Of course no one dares say that in this case (at least not so far- I have a few pages to go in reading this thread).

Frank Kern should give Terrie a refund. It doesn't matter whether she asked for one or not, or whether she deserves one. He should reward Terrie for being an upstanding customer.

My suggestion isn't based on "morals", it's a bottom line business decision. He gives the refund, knowing Terrie needs the money, tells her to keep the product, and he comes off as a hero, building trust and goodwill he couldn't get in any other way. And he has another loyal backer that will support him in the future.

And Kern wins the respect of many on this forum. Terrie's in a position of having to choose between her own moral fortitude and her personal finances, a tough decision without a clear-cut answer. Kern can eliminate this decision.

The OP already stated her intentions, and many of you are twisting it into something it is not.

And yeah, I called Davebo a douchebag. Why? Because he acts like that in numerous threads. It's a habitual thing with him. Just like Blackhatcat. Find any thread with Frank in it, and you are likely to see him bashing him.

It's all too common.

And then someone like me comes around and tries to promote a shred of decency and others try to twist it like I'm the bad guy?

Well I can take the insults.

And yes, I am very opinionated.

It's plain stupid and I shouldn't even talk to many members around here. I'm going to try my best to pretend they just don't exist and focus on those that are concerned about actually making honorable money.

And as far as honorable money is concerned...

Some even imply that it's wrong to be too good of a seller. What? Are you kidding me? That is the most absurd thing I've ever heard in a marketing forum.

But here's the real hard core truth about selling to people who aren't ready for Mass Control...

I turned down 6 sales, yes $6000 from people who were going to buy Mass Control but I honestly told them they were not ready. I didn't feel morally right having them spend $2000 on something that they may not be able to implement right away and considering the position they were in.

So anyone who thinks the big bad guru's are out to just get your money are so full of it, I don't even know what to say.

A group of you have a lot of growing up to do.

No one, and I mean no one in this thread was debating whether or not the woman should be entitled to the refund. Of course she is. And considering Frank banked over 5 MILLION on the promo I'm pretty confident a refund isn't going to make him go broke.

And if the affiliate did change up the offer on the bonus, then shame on him. Maybe he should compensate his commission.

Nobody is disagreeing with that.

My beef just comes from the culture that tends to permeate throughout the Warrior Forum and many that contribute here.

I have lot's of great friends in this place, and appreciate all the PM's I get from you folks thanking me for sticking up for what's right. I know most don't like to get into battles in public, and don't want to take the hits. No problem, I tend to do that for those that don't want to speak up.

But obviously I don't speak for all.

I just try to implement what is right.

And right now, I don't think the Warrior Forum is right for me. Way too many unscrupulous marketers lacking decent ethics and basic common sense.

Go ahead, twist all my words around and make me seem like the big bad defender of the guru's.

I'm off to make a smoothie, and a few grand!

Peace

PS: Terri, Tim, offer still stands.

I hope both of you get the best of out Frank's stuff, and the most you can from the Warrior Forum.

Yeah, shame on people for wanting to exercise a right that's laid out in bold on your salespages right above the buy button.

If you're so concerned with this, then why don't you just remove the 100% guarantee. That way you can be sure that people that buy your products will have the motivation to stick with it..since they can't get a refund.

Unless you're willing to do that, I think you should keep it quiet about morals, ethics, and "when a deal was a deal". Because it sounds like you want to experience higher sales associated with a refund policy, but none of the downside.

DUDE,

With all due respect...

You are completely missing the entire point. You are lost in the Bermuda Triangle right now

No, I'm not missing the point. I am just rejecting the entire premise becuase you guys don't understand what the definition of "Business Ethics" is. A violation of business ethics would be price fixing, bait and switch, deceptive marketing, etc. It's not "asking for a refund when you are technically entitled to one".

I'd accept a general comment if you said something like "the ease of refunding prevents people from implementing a plan to make money". But a violation of business ethics? hahaha. That's truly laughable.

If anything, it's a violation of business ethics to the buyer by not asking for the refund, because that is affecting the shareholders and stakeholders in your company...even if it's just you and your family.

I feel like we are speaking two entirely different languages now.

I'm off to read a book now... hopefully I can replenish some of the brainpower that has been hijacked from me in this thread.

I do not have any complaints about the product, so I don't feel good about returning it because my situation has changed. A few people have PM'd me with questions, so I'm going to wait and see how that turns out before I do anything. Unless I hear otherwise, I am going with "It's a physical product and I can sell it if I want."

Thank you so much for your replies!

Thanks for saying that Terrie.

I was a bit shocked at the replies that some Warriors were giving here to just simply refund. That's totally pathetic and I'm glad you have morals that would prohibit you from doing just that.

As for selling it on Ebay, I've personally reported sellers on Ebay and they have lost their accounts for doing so. However, they were selling bootlegs, not original copies.

I think it's your right to sell the product if you choose.

I won't even comment on those that are suggesting you refund. Instead I'll just add them to the blacklist of folks I'd rather not do business with.

But If frank says if for any reason, no questions asked, one is not happy, or one is not in the position to carry out the tasks, then ask for a refund.

Why would anyone be a douchbag, or an arse hole or what ever, for asking?

What is so morally wrong about asking for a refund if it's on the table?

If there's a slice of bread on the table are you not going to take it if you're hungry?

Terrie maybe in a state of financial difficulty, and didn't realise that the awesome course Frank laid out in MC 2.0 was just not her cup of tea at the time.

I signed up for the info millionaire, was on it for 3 months, then canceled, ok, canceling is a bit different from refunding, but all the same, it's almost the same thing, since he wont be getting any more $49 monthly's out of me, I figured since I have MC 2.0 now, that I paid in full, that it'll do the job just nicely and info millionaire couldn't come close to the tactics in MC 2.0

Originally Posted by Jason Moffatt

Thanks for saying that Terrie.

I was a bit shocked at the replies that some Warriors were giving here to just simply refund. That's totally pathetic and I'm glad you have morals that would prohibit you from doing just that.

As for selling it on Ebay, I've personally reported sellers on Ebay and they have lost their accounts for doing so. However, they were selling bootlegs, not original copies.

I think it's your right to sell the product if you choose.

I won't even comment on those that are suggesting you refund. Instead I'll just add them to the blacklist of folks I'd rather not do business with.

What is so morally wrong about asking for a refund if it's on the table?

In this case, it would most definitely be morally wrong for her to take advantage of the refund. If you can't see that--I doubt that anyone would be able to convince you otherwise.

I signed up for the info millionaire, was on it for 3 months, then canceled, ok, canceling is a bit different from refunding, but all the same, it's almost the same thing, since he wont be getting any more $49 monthly's out of me, I figured since I have MC 2.0 now, that I paid in full, that it'll do the job just nicely and info millionaire couldn't come close to the tactics in MC 2.0

FYI: Canceling a monthly membership is not 'almost the same thing' as taking advantage of a refund policy... it's not even in the same ballpark.

But If frank says if for any reason, no questions asked, one is not happy, or one is not in the position to carry out the tasks, then ask for a refund.

Why would anyone be a douchbag, or an arse hole or what ever, for asking?

What is so morally wrong about asking for a refund if it's on the table?

I agree, and it says a lot about some people using names like "douchebag" when talking about a customer returning a product which offered a money-back guarantee.

Why does the product even have a guarantee if that is the attitude? What is the point of a guarantee, if not to let the customer send the product back?

If this is really the seller's attitude, he should just say "All sales final- no refunds" clearly on the sales letter.

We *are* talking about returning a physical product for a refund, not asking for a refund for a downloaded product that you intend to keep using.

I've taken products back to stores for refunds, and did not get this anti-customer attitude. As long as I had the receipt, was within the refund deadline, and brought it back undamaged, there was no hassle at all, and they really didn't seem to care what my reason was... I certainly didn't have to claim the product was defective, just that I wanted to return it.

Just to make it clear, I'm not talking about buying and refunding things to get a "free rental" of them, like the person who buys a suit just to wear to an event and returns it, never having intended to keep it. I'm talking about returning things when I later decided to get something else instead, or changed my mind, or even realized I already had the item.

I was a bit shocked at the replies that some Warriors were giving here to just simply refund. That's totally pathetic and I'm glad you have morals that would prohibit you from doing just that.

As for selling it on Ebay, I've personally reported sellers on Ebay and they have lost their accounts for doing so. However, they were selling bootlegs, not original copies.

I think it's your right to sell the product if you choose.

I won't even comment on those that are suggesting you refund. Instead I'll just add them to the blacklist of folks I'd rather not do business with.

JMo, I've always been a fan of yours, but really? How can you recommend that someone takes a huge financial hit if they can't afford it? What is the refund policy for then? How is it any different than if she watched it all and decided that it wasn't worth the 2k for her at this time?

If I buy something from the mall, and my situation changes and I can't afford it, I have the right to return it. It is the same thing here.

But If frank says if for any reason, no questions asked, one is not happy, or one is not in the position to carry out the tasks, then ask for a refund.

Why would anyone be a douchbag, or an arse hole or what ever, for asking?

What is so morally wrong about asking for a refund if it's on the table?

If there's a slice of bread on the table are you not going to take it if you're hungry?

Terrie maybe in a state of financial difficulty, and didn't realise that the awesome course Frank laid out in MC 2.0 was just not her cup of tea at the time.

I signed up for the info millionaire, was on it for 3 months, then canceled, ok, canceling is a bit different from refunding, but all the same, it's almost the same thing, since he wont be getting any more $49 monthly's out of me, I figured since I have MC 2.0 now, that I paid in full, that it'll do the job just nicely and info millionaire couldn't come close to the tactics in MC 2.0

Originally Posted by Jason Moffatt

Thanks for saying that Terrie.

I was a bit shocked at the replies that some Warriors were giving here to just simply refund. That's totally pathetic and I'm glad you have morals that would prohibit you from doing just that.

As for selling it on Ebay, I've personally reported sellers on Ebay and they have lost their accounts for doing so. However, they were selling bootlegs, not original copies.

I think it's your right to sell the product if you choose.

I won't even comment on those that are suggesting you refund. Instead I'll just add them to the blacklist of folks I'd rather not do business with.

Of course you have to keep the "no refund" guru's a guru spirit.

If she do the refund and you say "Yes take the refund" - instantly you have devalued the material for the next few launches of Frank Kern and yours.

Not only that, but also decreased the value of other gurus launches.

Just wanted to provided the psychology behind Jason Moffats stants. So the common newbie can learn.

I was a bit shocked at the replies that some Warriors were giving here to just simply refund. That's totally pathetic and I'm glad you have morals that would prohibit you from doing just that.

What's totally pathetic is promising to deliver something that, a year later, still hasn't been delivered, despite sending an email to those people 6 weeks ago that they would be told in two weeks how to claim their copy.

6 weeks later...still waiting. So please, spare us the moral high ground shtick.

As such, I have no problem recommending that the lady get a refund. One, if true, her reason is more acceptable than most, and two, screw Frank, or anyone else for that matter. If you've come upon hard times and it comes down to eating, or John Doe guru millionaire losing a sale..well, let's just say, I'm gonna be eating. It's not personal, it's common sense.

She is a responsible buyer, and owns up to her purchase unlike many of the people around here.

And Nathan to be honest, I've been seeing you bad mouth Frank quite a bit here in the forum and I'm really hesitant to offer you any coaching or consulting until after the refund period is over as I'm worried you may just be another serial refunder as well.

Fair enough, but Frank shouldn't of being so good at creating desire, the need to know what it's all about.

Simple as that, eh!

Originally Posted by Jason Moffatt

If she felt it wasn't worth the price, then by all means refund it.

That's not that Franks refund policy states!

Originally Posted by Jason Moffatt

But that is not her complaint.

She is a responsible buyer, and owns up to her purchase unlike many of people around here.

Who said it had to be a complaint to get a refund?

Come on bro, be a bit more understanding.

Sure, I understand where you're coming from, it's a right ole biatch when ppl just snoop in to see what you got then ask for a refund.

BUT, if Frank policy is a no fuss, no hassle, no questions ask guarantee, then that's what it is.

And it's not going to look good on Frank if he turned around and said.

"Oh, I said S.M.S.M.F Now, I didn't say you could ask for a refund if my product was good, even if you can't do the course, go F yourself, you're getting nuffin, suffer and control your spending next time"...

That's gonna look good on Frank innit and a great marketing tactic.. NOT!...LOL

And this does have a good side to it.

It looks better on Frank for refunding, and if and when Terrie is in a better position to buy again and not in the situation she's in right now, she may buy Franks product again, just for being understanding and down to earth about it - wouldn't ya of thought so?

Fair enough, but Frank shouldn't of being so good at creating desire, the need to know what it's all about.

Simple as that, eh!

That's not that Franks refund policy states!

Who said it had to be a complaint to get a refund?

Come on bro, be a bit more understanding.

Sure, I understand where you're coming from, it's a right ole biatch when ppl just snoop in to see what you got then ask for a refund.

BUT, if Frank policy is a no fuss, no hassle, no questions ask guarantee, then that's what it is.

And it's not going to look good on Frank if he turned around and said.

"Oh, I said S.M.S.M.F Now, I didn't say you could ask for a refund if my product was good, even if you can't do the course, go F yourself, you're getting nuffin, suffer and control your spending next time"...

That's gonna look good on Frank innit and a great marketing tactic.. NOT!...LOL

And this does have a good side to it.

It looks better on Frank for refunding, and if and when Terrie is in a better position to buy again and not in the situation she's in right now, she may buy Franks product again, just for being understanding and down to earth about it - wouldn't ya of thought so?

Frank will refund anyone for any reason.

No one is disputing that.

But some of you folks that are so quick to pull the refund trigger just because of your own woes tarnishes everything marketers do.

And you should know this.

Yes, the refund policy is for any reason.

But those of us with a conscience don't refund because of our own negligence. We take it on the chin and man up to our mistakes.

I don't think it's about whether or not Frank will honour the refund. It's about preaching the mentality that you should get a refund on a product you've liked and used just because you are short of cash.

It's not illegal but, as Jason says, threads like this help you decide who you would do business with.

I feel sorry for the OP because she is totally blameless for the turn this thread has taken.

She is a responsible buyer, and owns up to her purchase unlike many of the people around here.

And Nathan to be honest, I've been seeing you bad mouth Frank quite a bit here in the forum and I'm really hesitant to offer you any coaching or consulting until after the refund period is over as I'm worried you may just be another serial refunder as well.

I hope I'm wrong.

Jason, are you serious? The only badmouthing I've said was that I was disappointed. If that's badmouthing then we've certainly got a clash of ideas.

In regards to being a serial refunder...returning something once doesn't make someone a serial refunder. Besides that, I'd be honest enough not to accept coaching if I returned the product. This IM world is a small one and I'm not a thief. I'm not sure if there is an accusation in that post, but I'll pretend there isn't.

Now, to the matter at hand...would you really rather see someone go into financial ruin (if that is the case here) or even close, just so someone can keep a sale? If someone bought one of my products and they returned it because they decided they couldn't afford it, I'd understand. If they did it often, that is different, but geez...you can't hold everyone to the knife like that. I'd rather see her do well and recover, so that she can buy more of my stuff down the road.

Jason, are you serious? The only badmouthing I've said was that I was disappointed. If that's badmouthing then we've certainly got a clash of ideas.

In regards to being a serial refunder...returning something once doesn't make someone a serial refunder. Besides that, I'd be honest enough not to accept coaching if I returned the product. This IM world is a small one and I'm not a thief. I'm not sure if there is an accusation in that post, but I'll pretend there isn't.

Now, to the matter at hand...would you really rather see someone go into financial ruin (if that is the case here) or even close, just so someone can keep a sale? If someone bought one of my products and they returned it because they decided they couldn't afford it, I'd understand. If they did it often, that is different, but geez...you can't hold everyone to the knife like that. I'd rather see her do well and recover, so that she can buy more of my stuff down the road.

I'm rather shocked by your response here.

Of course I don't want to see the gal go into financial ruins.

It just appears she has better business ethics then many around here, and I applaud that.

It takes a strong person to do what she's doing, and I for one respect that.

And I nor Frank would ever deny her a refund if need be.

(PS: No accusation in the post. Was just worried I was going to shell out some hard earned work and not get compensated. Like I said, I hope I'm wrong. My intent is to help anyone who is serious about applying the strategies).

I don't know how Frank's refund policy is worded. It may be that it is entirely ethical, and okay with Frank, if someone asks for a refund simply because they have changed their mind, or their situations have changed.

That doesn't mean that the OP can't hold herself to a higher standard. She should be applauded for her willingness to follow her own ideals, regardless of the situation she is in.

So, here is another part of the equation. I purchased Frank's package in part because of the bonus that one of the gurus was giving. The way the bonus was set up, I was pretty sure that I would be able to make enough money to recoup my costs pretty quickly. Several days later I received an email from that person saying that he had decided "to replace the original bonus with something better."

I am still relatively new at IM, so I wasn't really in a position to judge if his new bonus was better or not, but it is not what I originally thought I was getting. He did not ask if I preferred the second choice, but rather told me that was what he was doing.

I also do not feel good about returning Frank's product because I don't think it's fair to the guru for losing out on his commission. He did provide a good bonus, even though it wasn't the original. I am not complaining about the bonus--I just expected that things would work out differently than they have.

This additional factor is not at all Frank's fault, so he shouldn't have to bear the burden of my asking for a refund for what I think is actually a good product.

Actually, that brings up another matter--what to do about the bonus if I actually do sell the product. Hmmm, I don't have any rich uncles that could just die and leave me some money.

That's a shady move...changing the bonus after people have purchased it...I'm not sure what to do about that...however, I think you are feeling guilty when you shouldn't be. The guy changed his bonus and you'd feel bad if he didn't get a commission? I need you as my customer.

I just watched the sales video, and his language is pretty clear. Maybe you should watch it again and see what you think?

Now, if you think it is a good product, does that mean you think it is worth 2k? If that is the case, then why aren't you putting it into action? What about the 4 day cash machine? Did you try finding others to use the emails on?

There are a lot of ways you can make money with the course, but you won't make any money if you don't implement them. If you aren't going to return it, then I bet you'd make more money launching a product with MC then you would selling it on eBay. Just my .02

So, here is another part of the equation. I purchased Frank's package in part because of the bonus that one of the gurus was giving. The way the bonus was set up, I was pretty sure that I would be able to make enough money to recoup my costs pretty quickly. Several days later I received an email from that person saying that he had decided "to replace the original bonus with something better."

I am still relatively new at IM, so I wasn't really in a position to judge if his new bonus was better or not, but it is not what I originally thought I was getting. He did not ask if I preferred the second choice, but rather told me that was what he was doing.

I also do not feel good about returning Frank's product because I don't think it's fair to the guru for losing out on his commission. He did provide a good bonus, even though it wasn't the original. I am not complaining about the bonus--I just expected that things would work out differently than they have.

This additional factor is not at all Frank's fault, so he shouldn't have to bear the burden of my asking for a refund for what I think is actually a good product.

Actually, that brings up another matter--what to do about the bonus if I actually do sell the product. Hmmm, I don't have any rich uncles that could just die and leave me some money.

I'm starting to feel very silly about this thread!

Terrie,

Don't feel silly about the thread. And by all means, use up the bonus you got, even if you do sell the product. The guy will still get his commission.

If you send me a PM, I'll also give you my bonus.

All my products, plus I'll do a live chat with you on the phone to help you out.

Good on ya Jason for your offer to Terri although I don't entirely agree with you re: refunds. It is possible to buy something, delve into it and realize it's not for you. Sales letters and videos are meant to be persuasive and can often leave out critical info. In the case of the guru who moved the goalposts and changed his bonus offer....tsk tsk, he deserves to lose his commission if he didn't offer the customer the option of the original bonus. I can see both sides here and I also applaud Terri for her morals.

Frank offered a crazy guarantee (as he tends to) which gives any customer the right to return it for any reason (when you give that kind of guarantee, you're much more likely to sell people who are thinking about not buying due to things like lack of funds. That's the point of a crazy guarantee. You sell more and you refund more, but the extra sales generally outdo the extra refunds).

The OP has every right to refund it, and no one should have any problem with her if she did that. Or, she can do what she's doing if that's her style.

Changing the bonus was naughty, I wonder how many other people bought because of the original one offered.

If I'd bought through his link because of the original bonus then I'd expect it, and if I didn't receive it, then Frank would have known about it and I'd expect the commision he received from my purchase to be forfeited.

If you had been more experienced Terrie that's what you could have done.

Kim

Originally Posted by TerrieS

I'm sorry guys--I didn't mean to kick up such a fuss!

So, here is another part of the equation. I purchased Frank's package in part because of the bonus that one of the gurus was giving. The way the bonus was set up, I was pretty sure that I would be able to make enough money to recoup my costs pretty quickly. Several days later I received an email from that person saying that he had decided "to replace the original bonus with something better."

I am still relatively new at IM, so I wasn't really in a position to judge if his new bonus was better or not, but it is not what I originally thought I was getting. He did not ask if I preferred the second choice, but rather told me that was what he was doing.

I also do not feel good about returning Frank's product because I don't think it's fair to the guru for losing out on his commission. He did provide a good bonus, even though it wasn't the original. I am not complaining about the bonus--I just expected that things would work out differently than they have.

This additional factor is not at all Frank's fault, so he shouldn't have to bear the burden of my asking for a refund for what I think is actually a good product.

Actually, that brings up another matter--what to do about the bonus if I actually do sell the product. Hmmm, I don't have any rich uncles that could just die and leave me some money.

Having a no questions asked guarantee, is a huge selling point. So you have to pay the consequences when giving such a guarantee. If you have A Qualtiy product, then you'll never be hurt by such a guarantee. - Which is why Frank does so well with it.

However, Frank banks on the fact that most people that buy his product are ethical people, and carry out their business in an ethical way. Coming into a public forum and telling people they should get a refund in an un-ethical manner kind of throws off the averages a bit, and could work to hurt Frank's good faith offer.

You can't tell me, considering the verbage in the video, that he wouldn't expect all sorts of crazy refunds? He's made the guarantee because he feels so good about the product that he thinks most will keep it. After watching the video again, I really don't think he'd call this unethical.

I don't understand how opening it all and saying you don't like it and returning it is OK, but opening just a bit and changing your mind about the purchase isn't? I'm not seeing any congruency here.

Now if she went and made copies of it all, then asked for a refund, and sold the rest of what she had on ebay...I'd call THAT unethical.

You can't tell me, considering the verbage in the video, that he wouldn't expect all sorts of crazy refunds? He's made the guarantee because he feels so good about the product that he thinks most will keep it. After watching the video again, I really don't think he'd call this unethical.

I don't understand how opening it all and saying you don't like it and returning it is OK, but opening just a bit and changing your mind about the purchase isn't? I'm not seeing any congruency here.

Now if she went and made copies of it all, then asked for a refund, and sold the rest of what she had on ebay...I'd call THAT unethical.

Obviously neither one of your scenarios is against Franks own rules. However there is a difference ethically. If someone doesn't like a product and returns it, then that has something to do w/ Frank's quality control, and it's something he can control. However if someone returns a product, because they didn't budget their funds before hand, then Frank can't have any control over this - and he shouldn't have to. It's up to the individual to only buy what they can afford. And I think that this OP realizes this, and is doing the right (ethical) thing. Bravo.

Then when people said ask for a refund, then you have domino effect of ass-kissing. Jmo comes to the rescue talking about honor and ethics trying to save Frank Kern a sale and call people douchebags for asking for a refund within a refund period , then a few JMO fanboys come to the rescue to defend Jmo talking about honor codes and the like, then you have the soft sellers that say that it's perfectly acceptable to ask for a refund but they would never do it because it's against their personal code.

Ass-kissing? Fan boys? Would you say that if everyone agreed with you?

You're acting like a jealous person now.

I haven't seen any ass-kissing in this thread at all. Don't let the fact that everyone won't always agree with you get you down sport.

Jealous of what and who? I'm pointing out that you've got to be a fanboy if you are trying to convince a lady in financial difficulty that it's unethical to ask for a refund under a 'no questions asked' refund policy.

She didn't have to be convinced of anything. She already made up her mind that she wouldn't return the product.

Jealous of what and who? I'm pointing out that you've got to be a fanboy if you are trying to convince a lady in financial difficulty that it's unethical to ask for a refund under a 'no questions asked' refund policy.

Can i point out Terrie doesn't need convincing she has already decided herself that it is unethical. And others are trying convince her otherwise.

Obviously whether or not this is ethical can vary depending on your own ethics. But I guarantee that these no questions asked offers bank on the fact that most people will not refund an item simply because they later find out that they can't afford it, or have no time for it - which is what the OP says in her original post (no mention of a house burning down - but that shouldn't even matter).

Obviously whether or not this is ethical can vary depending on your own ethics. But I guarantee that these no questions asked offers bank on the fact that most people will not refund an item simply because they later find out that they can't afford it, or have no time for it - which is what the OP says in her original post (no mention of a house burning down - but that shouldn't even matter).

How can you guarantee that? Would you really have me believe, that Frank, who is a veteran of million dollar launches, would be blindsided by a refund request based on someone not being able to afford it? Come on...he's probably had much, much, much stranger refund requests than that.

How can you guarantee that? Would you really have me believe, that Frank, who is a veteran of million dollar launches, would be blindsided by a refund request based on someone not being able to afford it? Come on...he's probably had much, much, much stranger refund requests than that.

Nathan,

This really isn't about Frank at all.

He'd honor any request, no matter how silly. You'd be amazed at some of the generous things I've seen him do over the years. Truly ridiculous, next level generous stuff. Of course, hardly anyone sees this side as he's super modest about the whole thing and keeps it pretty hush.

Anyhow, this isn't really about him.

It's more about each individual purchaser.

I guess I just like the days when you spit on your palm and shook hands on a deal. Back when a deal was a deal.

Ya know, all that commendable behavior type stuff like taking responsibility for your actions and just doing what is right.

What bothers me here the most is that instead of helping this poor women to implement that materials and make her a sum far beyond the $2000, people are suggesting refund.

I have no doubt that Frank would honor practically any refund request. I can't attest to his character because I don't know him, but the way he stated his policy I'm fairly certain he has taken things like this into consideration.

I think there are a lot of assumptions being made here that are simply incorrect. Why offer a refund if people should feel guilty for getting one? That's all I'm asking.

I asked her what she's done with the course, but she never responded. I agree that she should be worrying more about making more money than getting her money back. However, I also don't want to pretend that this has anything to do with morals, when it really has more to do with commissions. I bet if you asked people that were not IM'ers what they thought about the situation, they'd have a completely different opinion.

Its like asking a bunch of car salesmen what they think about their customers. I'm certainly not getting a warm fuzzy here.

I would advise you to contact Frank Kern directly. Explain to him your situation. Ask him what he would do if he were in your shoes...

Absolutely (IMHO) the very best reply/suggestion in this whole thread...
As many have mentioned, Frank appears to be a stand-up guy, and while
being an excellent salesman, I'm sure that he's also a fine human being,
and will do whatever it takes to make TerrieS a happy camper...

The lady needs to make her own mind up about whether to seek a refund or not.

Kern did promise one for any reason at all if you wanted one.

I wonder how many extra sales he got because of this excellent guarantee? Probably an extra 25% maybe. Especially when it is a high ticket item.

What if he had said in his video:

"You only get your money back if you try it and if it doesn't work. I won't give you a refund if you don't have the time to do it, or if you run into financial difficulty perhaps because of the credit crunch. That's your problem not mine. So give me some m*ther f**king m*ney and don't ask me for a bleep bleep refund".

No, he said if you want your money back for ANY reason then you can have it.

Under the circumstances it appears she needs the money more than Kern right now.

Jason,
For what it's worth, I'd consider purchasing Terri's copy of Mass Control 2 from her for full price if there was a way I could get the bonus you offered for folks that purchased through your link.

Jason,
For what it's worth, I'd consider purchasing Terri's copy of Mass Control 2 from her for full price if there was a way I could get the bonus you offered for folks that purchased through your link.

Respectfully,
Tim

Well, I really wouldn't be compensated as an affiliate, but I do like you Tim, so therefore I'd be inclined to say YES.

But I have to step in and give the dude a lesson when he can't stop himself.

I have no fanbase, and no one is giving me a thank you, yet. But I dont care about this. I know a lot of old timers here is up and awake. For the n00bs it's probably too far fetched from their reality, so they cant grasp Mofat magics.

I'm gonna fight for the old board members. I could infact just sell a WSO in the forum with all the gurus tactics in them.

Its one side to sell like Filesaime and get his launch out. It's another side to troll every thread and bring Frank to the lights of heavens, when ever he can.

Even if it drains someone who needs the money badly.

This really have me supspicious about the big launches.

Why fight so hard for $2k when they earn millions each launch?

Is Moffat paid by every dollar he can save for Frank. Real silly coming in here when the lady real needs her money.

First, she should have known that she couldn't afford it before purchasing. I bet she did know that but decided to try it out. Well when she purchased, that means someone couldn't purchase who could afford it because of the limitations on quantity.

It is about taking personal responsibility which a lot of people on this forum do not do.

The other side is she is in her full right to a refund. No one really disputed it. I am sure it would be granted to her. It all depends on the type of person she is. She seems to have a buyer for the product so she gets her bonus and gets her money back. It all worked out.

I cannot say if a refund in this situation is unethical or not. It really isn't my call. I just need to be true to myself. If I wasn't sure I could afford purchasing it then I wouldn't have purchased it.

The refund guarantee is a marketing ploy that works. There will always be refund because of it but that isn't such a bad thing. It means you sold well.

Just watch all of my posts, I'm seriously a bad ass, I just had surgery got damn... I cant even get my feet to fit my shoes. I'm in serious pain, and I can give proof on this, unlike Jasons 5 minute booty call on Skype,

Well, I really wouldn't be compensated as an affiliate, but I do like you Tim, so therefore I'd be inclined to say YES.

Hey brother,
I'm sure me you and Terri could work something out.

Also, I have no ill towards anyone in this thread. I'm just offering a possible solution that does the following:

1 - Allow Terri to sell her course

2 - Allow Frank to keep his well earned profit for the hard work in making his course.

3 - Allow me to purchase a course I initially missed out on getting and if I can get a top notch bonus from another marketer (J-Mo) who has something to teach that I can learn and apply to my own business to increase my ROI then it's a win-win for all parties.

Warriors, at the end of the day we can all agree to disagree on certain aspects of how to run an online business but as a group we gain nothing by ripping in to each other.

The forum should be a place where we can post our thoughts and feelings on running an Internet Marketing business without any form of hatred towards each other because let's face it, this is tough stuff and if as a group we can't carry on intelligent discussions that allow us to all learn from each other then what does this forum exist for...? To merely sell products to each other in the WSO section and a place for trolls to come and pawn garbage off on this group................I certainly hope not.

I have to say, I follow both Frank and Jason in their marketing ( free video's, ect... ) and I wanted very much to buy that info at the time and simply was not able to do so ...I was tempted to " charge it " but was headed to Europe with my wife so she could have cancer treatments in Switzerland.....never know what you need $$$ till done.

I am in total agreement about not simply asking for a refund. I have a brick and morter business and offer refunds if unsatisfied with services and have never had one. To think that someone would simply ask for one due to changes beyond seller control troubles me. I would like to see research on what % of refunds are actually for good reasons and those that are not.

I came here to learn and am glad to see that some things, I already know and do not need to be taught.

She purchased Mass Control when it launched, so lets give her the benefit of the doubt and say she looked it over.. the course IS expensive and if she needs the money in case of emergency, then she should be able to return it with no problem. There is nothing we can say here that will change her mind, I am sure MC course has enough information to get started with internet marketing.

When you offer a crazy guarantee, your intention is to convert people who would otherwise have decided no. So it's the seller's fault if someone misses out on the last copy, not the fault of someone who hype-purchased.

As for ethical or unethical - that shouldn't even be up for debate. When the guarantee states that you can return it for absolutely any reason, how can this situation be unethical? It can't.

Unethical would be dishonestly refunding on a "conditional" guarantee.

When you offer a crazy guarantee, your intention is to convert people who would otherwise have decided no. So it's the seller's fault if someone misses out on the last copy, not the fault of someone who hype-purchased.

As for ethical or unethical - that shouldn't even be up for debate. When the guarantee states that you can return it for absolutely any reason, how can this situation be unethical? It can't.

Unethical would be dishonestly refunding on a "conditional" guarantee.

Yes, it is the buyers fault for buying something they couldn't afford. So everyone in debt and losing their houses is not at fault, it was all the hype going on in the housing markets. They should not have to pay, eh?

I hate it when people don't take responsibility for themselves and blame others. That is one reason I really hate this IM market. There seems to be a lot of them in this niche.

Yes, it is the buyers fault for buying something they couldn't afford. So everyone in debt and losing their houses is not at fault, it was all the hype going on in the housing markets. They should not have to pay, eh?

I hate it when people don't take responsibility for themselves and blame others. That is one reason I really hate this IM market. There seems to be a lot of them in this niche.

Tempers are frayed too much in this thread. Still:

I agree with the part about housing market, somewhat. This situation is totally different. The difference: housing market does not offer an unconditional guarantee and everyone knew/knows that. Here, there was an unconditional guarantee. Both situations are completely different, if you consider that.

Do not compare apples and oranges.

(At the same time, I understand the frustration of people blaming others without even trying.)

A little bit of advice, Instead of wasting your time in this forum, seek help dude. Maybe its not too late for you.

Before you make allegations, do your research.

Jason "the moffster" doesn't need to manipulate the system, he is a proven marketer that over delivers.

Also the help and input he gives back to this forum is invaluable, not to mention the contacts he has.

So "Magic Johnston" LOL LOL F%$^K OFF and seek help.

What am I going to seek help for, HIV? :rolleyes:

I just thought Moffatt were intentional to keep a few grands. From a lady who obviously made a mistake. If it's wrong to call somebody out over this, then were do you draw the line? And we can discuss it.

You promote a 30-days iron claud money backer, you have to deliver. It sad to see greed evoke people to step over dead bodies.

I agree with the part about housing market, somewhat. This situation is totally different. The difference: housing market does not offer an unconditional guarantee and everyone knew/knows that. Here, there was an unconditional guarantee. Both situations are completely different, if you consider that.

Do not compare apples and oranges.

(At the same time, I understand the frustration of people blaming others without even trying.)

No, instead you got people filing bankruptcy in order to keep banks from foreclosing on them. People can literally stay in their houses for a year without paying.

I am making a statement about personal responsibility. It has nothing to do with a refund guarantee and therefore is a proper comparison.

I am making a statement about personal responsibility. It has nothing to do with a refund guarantee and therefore is a proper comparison.

That's alright. You've made it.

Still, the fact remains: OP has every right to return the product, if she feels like returning it. If the seller doesn't like that, tough luck. Shouldn't have offered that return policy if he couldn't afford it. Unconditional guarantee means unconditional guarantee. End of story. Lock, stock and barrel.

Still, the fact remains: OP has every right to return the product, if she feels like returning it. If the seller doesn't like that, tough luck. Shouldn't have offered that return policy if he couldn't afford it. Unconditional guarantee means unconditional guarantee. End of story. Lock, stock and barrel.

Still, the fact remains: OP has every right to return the product, if she feels like returning it. If the seller doesn't like that, tough luck. Shouldn't have offered that return policy if he couldn't afford it. Unconditional guarantee means unconditional guarantee. End of story. Lock, stock and barrel.

Again, to anyone else "browbeating": OP has every right to return the product, if she feels like returning it. If the seller doesn't like that, tough luck. Shouldn't have offered that return policy if he couldn't afford it. Unconditional guarantee means unconditional guarantee. End of story. Lock, stock and barrel.

Yes, it is the buyers fault for buying something they couldn't afford. So everyone in debt and losing their houses is not at fault, it was all the hype going on in the housing markets. They should not have to pay, eh?

If you want to make housing analogies, here's a fair one: someone realizes he can no longer afford his mortgage payments, so he sells his house and moves somewhere cheaper. Nothing wrong with that.

No one in this thread is saying the lady shouldn't pay for the product she bought. I think she already has paid for it. And to get a refund, she would have to return the product, right? I don't see anyone saying she should be able to get a refund and keep the course (which would be more similar to your housing example).

If you want to make housing analogies, here's a fair one: someone realizes he can no longer afford his mortgage payments, so he sells his house and moves somewhere cheaper. Nothing wrong with that.

No one in this thread is saying the lady shouldn't pay for the product she bought. I think she already has paid for it. And to get a refund, she would have to return the product, right? I don't see anyone saying she should be able to get a refund and keep the course (which would be more similar to your housing example).

I never stated that anyone said any of those things.

I am saying she shouldn't have purchased at all if she couldn't afforded it. I never stated that she couldn't or shouldn't refund. That is up to her.

I just see what other people are stating. Responsibility and she took that responsibility.

I can't tell you how many posts I see on this forum that talk about charging back. That is normally the first thing people say. They don't say contact the seller, try to work with the seller or so on... They just say call your credit card company.

I even seen one thread where the person got exactly what he paid for and just decided he didn't want it and complained there was no refunds on the product.

In the housing market, people took out all their equity or moved into houses they couldn't afford. That is why you are seeing the problems that you are now. It was easy for them. Not it is easy to either file bankruptcy or walk away from the house. Most can't sell their houses because the owe more than it is worth.

I have dealt with a lot of people in foreclosure and most of them are would not fall into the responsible buyer that your post talked about.

I can't tell you how many posts I see on this forum that talk about charging back. That is normally the first thing people say. They don't say contact the seller, try to work with the seller or so on... They just say call your credit card company.

Now did you hear what motives they had, why they wanted their money back?

I'm not stating you trying to generalize, I think sometimes a chargeback will be needed too, if they don't deliver on promises, we have the right to get our money??

I agree there are tons of slackers taking advantage of gurantees. But when it's educational and rational products, it's really a thing to discuss over.

That's how I see it.

You don't seem to be able to comprehend what I am saying as well as others in this thread.

I stated a refund took 30 days from a established store. I do think they have 30 days or more to refund based on law.

I did not make the comparison of buying from a retail store and a digital product.

I do buy things from Amazon and it would be the same thing.

It is these types of comments that has created one crazy thread here. The OP stated she didn't want to refund and people pushed her into it. Then they complained and start talking BS about not taking the refund and told others were trying to talk her out of he refund.

You don't seem to be able to comprehend what I am saying as well as others in this thread.

I stated a refund took 30 days from a established store. I do think they have 30 days or more to refund based on law.

I did not make the comparison of buying from a retail store and a digital product.

I do buy things from Amazon and it would be the same thing.

It is these types of comments that has created one crazy thread here. The OP stated she didn't want to refund and people pushed her into it. Then they complained and start talking BS about not taking the refund and told others were trying to talk her out of he refund.

She didn't want a refund people.

No one tried to convince her to get a refund, some recommended that option to her.

However, this has gone way beyond that now. At this point, we're talking about sellers that speak out of both sides of their mouths.

I must be reading the thread differently than you. It looked like to me that people were trying to talk her into refunding.

Frank never denied nor told the woman not to ask for a refund so I wonder what end you are talking out of?

Well Frank doesn't post in forums...so I wouldn't expect him to show up here.

I didn't see anyone try to convince her to do anything to be honest...from either side. This isn't even about the OP anymore...this is about the "refund policy." We are finding out that a refund policy is meant to benefit the seller, but not the buyer. You are a "douchebag," without ethics or morals if you send a product back.

It is these types of comments that has created one crazy thread here. The OP stated she didn't want to refund and people pushed her into it. Then they complained and start talking BS about not taking the refund and told others were trying to talk her out of he refund.

She didn't want a refund people.

Thomas,

Thank you for reinforcing this point. There is only one side of this argument encouraging this woman to do anything.

Not one mammal in this entire thread has even suggested that she shouldn't refund this product.

For the sake of mankind, I want to believe that people are smart enough to understand the content in this thread.

You guys are probably more dense than I originally thought. In case you haven't realized, we got off the topic of the original poster and onto the idea that requesting a refund=unethical business. Which is what you guys, the moral police, were suggesting.

You have a reading comprehension problem which makes sense after reading most of your posts.

This country would be far better off if we had more people like the OP. That is what I am saying.

Martin, when will you realize that we aren't trying to convince the OP to do anything? Most of us have moved past the OP and are just using her as an example for this magic ethical refund thingamajig. I could care less what she does with the package...I got my panties in a bunch when we started labeling people for believing that a no questions asked refund means just that.

Yes,your keep bringing this up, and me and many other members see it from a different angle, she could have taken the refund if she really needed the money. But that's not 100% of my point.

She didn't want a refund. She could have done a lot of things but choose to deal with it in responsible way. That is the way she thought and a lot of others thought. That is the point. You can try to make it a greedy guru thing all you want. It just shows how ignorant you are.

She didn't want a refund.
She didn't want a refund.

Kern never said no to her refund because she didn't want a refund. Now Kern is greedy for not giving a refund for a person who didn't want a refund.

She didn't want a refund. She could have done a lot of things but choose to deal with it in responsible way. That is the way she thought and a lot of others thought. That is the point. You can try to make it a greedy guru thing all you want. It just shows how ignorant you are.

She didn't want a refund.
She didn't want a refund.

Kern never said no to her refund because she didn't want a refund. Now Kern is greedy for not giving a refund for a person who didn't want a refund.

Thomas,

Will you stop beating around the bush and say what you mean in plain, simple English?

Davebo and Magic Johnson, from reading your posts in this thread it is obvious that both of you seem to have a personal problem with Jason Moffat.

According to the rules of this forum, if you have a problem with another member, it's between you and that member. Take it outside.

So why are you wasting your time blowing hot air in here?

You both come across as major jerks, and unproven jerks at that. I have known about Jason (and Frank) for several years. He has proven himself as a contributing member of this forum and every product I have purchased from him has exceeded my expectations.

Can I say the same for either of you? NO! I've never even heard of either of you! I have never bought any of your products (assuming you guys actually have your own products...) and I certainly will NOT purchase nor recommend anything from either of you after reading the nasty and mean-spirited comments the two of you have posted in this thread!

Both Jason and Frank know what they are doing. Do you? Doesn't look like it!

Both of you should step away from the keyboard and think about what you are doing to your future reputation on this forum. You've already lost one potential REPEAT customer (the most valuable type) and every time you berate someone here with a nasty name, you risk losing yet another. And unless you go back and change every one of your posts, everyone else who comes here will read what you wrote! (And that won't even do the trick, because a lot of your posts were quoted in posts by others, so you can't even delete those!)

Until you think about that, go ahead and keep trying to impress us with your name calling. After all, it's not my business you are destroying...

Terri, I hope you were able to sell your copy of MC 2.0 to another Warrior or better yet, put it to good use and make a heck of a lot more money with it than your investment.

And don't you worry about causing such a stir. It wasn't anything you did. The fault lies with the jerks who took over this thread and decided to make things personal. That happens here sometimes, unfortunately.

Magic Johnson, if you are referring to me when you mention "Like I care about this members poping up suddenly, they could as well get cut a check to defend. Moffatimus... (but that's just pure speculations) "

I can answer your question: No, I receive nothing in the way of compensation in any form from either Mr. Moffat nor Mr. Kern for mentioning them in my posts.

I just think the posts in this thread from yourself and davebo have exceeded the limits of civility and are quite rude and uncalled for.

Becoming a respected Warrior Member takes time and effort. Name calling is easy. Respect must be earned.

Quick question here: What is the issue with asking for a refund for a product that touts an iron-clad, no questions asked money-back guarantee? I presume the subtext is that some purchasers will have 1) made the decision to purchase knowing they could refund if they found the product did not suit their situation or circumstance, and 2) um, they found the product did not suit their situation or circumstance.

Presumably the guarantee was given not so much because the vendor enjoys giving refunds so much as he/she loves making sales ... and knows that the guarantee will increase those sales.

While personal responsibility on the part of the customer is important, so is the responsibility of a vendor to honor -- even cheerfully -- that "iron-clad" guarantee. No?

I think the beef started when people starting discussing morality and ethics of
asking for refunds vs. not asking for refunds.

Although the OP said she had no intentions of asking for a refund.

But whatever, it got entertaining nonetheless

Thanks Jason. I got lost in all of the tangential & spurious specificity. <-- (glad I didn't have to say that out loud! sorry, It's late here.)

I think what bothers me about this is that although the OP said she didn't think she should request a refund, she purchased under the condition of that guarantee and should be made to feel entirely comfortable exercising it. She clearly has described that it does not suit her situation now. What more needs discussing?

Enough said, in my opinion. The specifics are none of anyone else's business. She owes no one else an explanation.

Sheesh, talk about your ordinary every day thread taking a bunch of twists and turns.

First, a rock solid guarantee doesn't need an excuse, if this is what the OP desires. So back off. She already said she wasn't comfortable with a refund, the question was how to sell it.

Second, if a physical product is purchased, it belongs to the purchaser. They may do with it what they wish, within the bounds of the law & the copyright. So, yes, she may sell it on the secondary market.

Third, I would let this thread age a day or two and see what kind of offers the original poster gets for her course. It was sold out, and is currently unavailable. It is likely that she can recoup all of her cost with the right offers in PM's.

Fourth, Ebay isn't the place for you to try to sell this course, for two reasons:

Many of the IM/Frank products there are bootlegs, selling for much less money than this course. That means that the market is willing to pay a couple of hundred dollars for a 'deal' in bootlegs but you probably won't get anywhere near your costs.

In addition, a big sale or product like this for big money should not be one of the first things you list on Ebay--it has it's own learning curve, and it is pretty steep when it's a big price tag that matters. If you are interested in ebay for the future, start small and slow an work your way up to this.

You'd be amazed at some of the generous things I've seen him do over the years. Truly ridiculous, next level generous stuff. Of course, hardly anyone sees this side as he's super modest about the whole thing and keeps it pretty hush.

Cool, as a friend you will put this out there but when the time calls for it. Not in a thread like this, you're too emotionally invested in the responses now.

Originally Posted by Jason Moffatt

What bothers me here the most is that instead of helping this poor women to implement that materials and make her a sum far beyond the $2000, people are suggesting refund.

Are we in the marketing business or the refund business?

How about we talk about things that will make her some money?

That seems to make a lot more sense to me.

***Applauding*** Literally not some LOL type internet thing but I clapped for real at the screen when reading this. Offering your bonus earlier to her for no compensation other than a human being helping another is great. You truly do care about people and it shows. Yes helping her make money was the motivation for her spending $2K.

Terrie is good about it. She doesn't want to screw Frank out of the refund, she was bait and switched on the bonus. What that guy thought was better may have not been for her so it's a sticky situation. Terrie did you send him an email stating your situation? That promise was the terms of you buying from his link after all. All in all if you email him he may take you up on the original deal and Jason is willing to offer his bonus as well because he's a good dude too. And he knows Frank Kern so knows the info in the program so that is a hell of a bonus.

For anyone giving the refund feedback, well think about it. Frank created this course so he knows it inside and out, he won't benefit at all from getting it back. But there's people like TimG (great name so I like you) wanting to buy it who missed out then. So this is massive value instead of waiting for the next launch.

Terrie got her info out of it, people willing to make that info WORK and others want this info so it's win-win for all if she sells it off now instead of refunding.

Guys... no one is suggesting that she shouldn't take advantage of the refund. In fact, she would be well within her rights if she chose to do so.

It's her "not wanting to wear out her welcome" styled attitude that some find commendable. Just because someone is willing to extend a helping hand, doesn't mean that you should always take it.

davebo, loz, and anyone else that thinks that she should get her money back...

All of your comments in support of her exercising her right to a refund are correct and fair. And, there isn't one comment in this entire thread that comes close to encouraging her to repress her right to request a full refund.

Some of you may even want to argue that this isn't a 'moral' issue. Well... it is. The OP doesn't feel like requesting a refund is the 'right' thing to do. Otherwise... she would have requested a refund from the start.

Also, I'm not defending Jason... nor am I one of his "fanboy's" but I understand the point of his initial comment. Now, if his choice of words rubbed any of you the wrong way--that's between you guys.

Marc, I think my main problem is that people are trying to turn this into something it isn't. Some are imposing standards that they don't impose on themselves behind closed doors.

I could be wrong, but the fact that she feels guilty for screwing an affiliate out of a commission, even though he screwed her out of a bonus, says more about the situation the people might realize.

Many times when people buy products, they don't want to return it because they feel stupid for not "getting it."

Furthermore, when a thread is clouded by advice from affiliates, it becomes even more of a complex issue.

Let's face it, Frank is one of those infallible "guru" types that people don't want to cross. I'm guessing the OP feels that if she did return it, she'd be put on the blacklist and wouldn't be "part of the club." I could be talking out my ass, but that's just my guess.

When I buy a lamp from Lowe's and I take it home and decide it isn't right for me, I have zero qualms about returning it. That is the way of the business world.

This doesn't have anything to do with "my word is my bond" type of stuff.

And if the OP ever did decide to get a refund, I'm certain this thread has probably convinced her otherwise. She's basically been told she has no ethics or morals if she does so.

While we're talking about the ethics of refunding a purchase
made "in error", isn't there also an ethical dimension toSELLING "in error" - to less (or un-) qualified prospects?

I've had a discussion about that prickly subject with Jeff Walker
and Tony Blake around the time of PLF 2.0 launch, and am still
wondering about it now in light of this exchange!

I believe there is. I guess for those with shorter-term business models, it's irrelevant. It's purely a conscience issue.

But I think it's worth considering that if you sell someone a physical course with 'thud factor' (tm P.Myers), then that thud factor can come back to haunt you.

If the buyer ends up stuck with it, and it's absolutely no use to them, they may hang on to it and keep it on the shelf purely because they can't bare to chuck $xxxx worth of nothing in the bin.

And every time they glance at that shelf, and see a row of cheapo half-broken DVD cases with your name all over it, the thud factor will apply every time - while they consider their greatest purchasing errors and curse the day they fell for the hype while wondering what benefits they could have got from spending the money more wisely.

The 'selling in error' aspect is one of those grey areas where many marketers seem to find it too easy to push the boundaries, while they are composing their sales copy and dreaming of multiple figure pay-days.

How can you expect the 'Seller' to have any understanding of whether a potential buyer is 'qualified', especially in a sale where the two parties do not meet face-to-face.

I think they call it market research followed by targetted marketing.

Just look how many jaded individuals arrive here talking about how they have spent a lot of money on pipe-dreams. Some see opportunity in this. Others see a marketplace that's utterly jaded and unpleasant to work in - unless you don't give a damn and just see it all as 'great marketing.'

It's an endless debate, because one side doesn't factor in 'providing value' as having any place in the equation.

It's really easy to attempt to absolve oneself by pointing out 'caveat emptor.' But if that is the case, why is so much effort spent studying, disucssing and targetting 'desperate buyers' and working on emotional triggers to get the sale?

How many of these desperate buyers actually *solve* their problems after making the purchase? How many of the salespage claims are actually fulfilled?

Sure, it's possible to justify these tactics as 'marketing' but presumeably we'll also be welcoming gangsters and drug dealers into the fold as our soulmates, and won't be complaining at all when the unsatisfied customers scream 'Mr. XYZ is a scammer and rip off merchant' far and wide across the internet?

Personally I don't blame the 'man on the street' marketer. I don't want to take it too far 'out there' but the fact is, if you turn on your TV, even the most imbecilic viewer is going to notice that the problems are starting at the top, affecting everyone below, and consequently dripping down through the system. It's a dog scam dog world.

It's an endless debate, because one side doesn't factor in 'providing value' as having any place in the equation.

Yes thats a good point.

This whole debate, while being very funny in parts, and providing me with a handy 'heads up' on who-not-to-do-business-with-in-any-circumstances, has provided some useful insights.

At the end of day the a seller cannot be held responsible for how people want to spend their money. People like chasing dreams, whether it's using their credit card to pay for a vacation they cannot really afford, or alcohol and drugs they do not really need.

At the end of the a seller cannot be held responsible for how people want to spend their money. People like chasing dreams, whether it's using their credit card to pay for a vacation they cannot really afford, or alcohol and drugs they do not really need.

It's thier choice, thier responsibilty, not that of the seller.

And that's the standard, well-worn get-out.

It comes down to this - are you part of the problem, or part of the solution?

The consequences of this choice are debateable, subjective, and provoke far wider discussions than the realms of what's on-topic in this forum.

Which is why I brought up the drug dealer analogy above - it's a good one. If your only principles are 'supply meets demand' - fine.

But you better make sure you earn enough to buy a fortified palace on a desert island when society consists entirely of kids 'high on crack, toting a machine gun' looking for someone to rob to get their next fix, or simply someone to take out their frustration on.

My point - the 'get-out' you used above is way too simple and 'surface-level' to solve any discussion. And in case anyone is tempted, please don't try and exclude the drug dealer analogy by stating that it's illegal - so are $50bn ponzi schemes, but that doesn't stop it affecting everyone

An example of the depth of it - let's compare two deals by the hypothetical drug dealer.

a) sells crack to an already exisiting 50 year old crack addict on his last legs, who pleads with him for a fix

b) hangs around outside schools, employing youngsters to ingratiate themselves with the pupils, introducing them to crack and creating an unstoppable epidemic amongst school-age teenagers

The consequences of each sale are entirely different.

Hence, why targetting your markets correctly does make a huge difference, and why spreading your net to capture as many people as possible regardless of their suitability makes a massive difference regarding the state of the marketplace, and the quantity of unhappy buyers.

Yes it's an analogy, and yes I used an extreme example to add emphasis - because without the extreme used to add emphasis it's far too easy to blur things and roll out the 'get-out' and claim that no harm has been done, and that the customer is to blame.

When someone spins a yarn that for $97 you can buy your golden ticket to paradise - are they 'satisfying demand' or pulling a fast one?

If it was the former, then why do they need a pre-sell or salespage? Why not just a headline with 'Golden Ticket Here' and a buy button for $97?

Hence, why targetting your markets correctly does make a huge difference, and why spreading your net to capture as many people as possible regardless of their suitably makes a massive difference regarding the state of the marketplace, and the quantity of unhappy buyers.

There's the trouble; this whole thread involved someone who is not an 'unhappy' buyer.

You cannot filter out irresponsible buyers, just deal responsibly with those who come to light.

There's the trouble; this whole thread involved someone who is not an 'unhappy' buyer.

You cannot filter out irresponsible buyers, just deal responsibly with those who come to light.

That's a very good point - if we are absolutely convinced that the OP is an irresponsible buyer (no offence OP) as opposed to an unhappy one.

But let's look at the 'not so minor' details.

The OP stated this in a forum full of marketers, where the seller's No.2 cohort miraculously found their way here to make his points about why it is wrong for others to suggest refunding, and the actual seller is more than likely to be reading every word - and the OP is likely to also be aware of these things.

It's already been mentioned a few posts above that buyers don't want to risk falling out with the big guns by appearing as a serial refunder (who may, incidentally, become potential JV targets in future - although this is mainly a myth concocted for the obvious reasons).

It's just SO easy to accidentally miss a few minor details and use that grey area to your advantage, especially when you're a 'marketer' who spends every day surrounded by hype, persuasion, sales copy etc.

There is also a time for being real, if we are going to have a sensible discussion - and that means not missing key, important facts, unless we are to behave as 'irresponsibly' as the buyers we refer to.

How easy was it to ignore all of this, and make definite statements based on it being a fact that the OP was 100% telling the truth, rather than glossing over the truth because she doesn't want to create the wrong impression in the worst possible place to do so, yet also the best place to ask for advice (AND also advertise the item for sale for free - as has been proven by TimG)?

It's just TOO easy for marketers to find a get-out and justify anything and everything by blaming buyers.

But is there no place for responsible marketing? Are there no conceivable benefits of this approach? Do all potential customers want lies dressed as truth, rather than the real truth? Are ALL potential customers irresponsible, uneducated sheep?

{sidenote to OP - apologies for the strong wording, but it's useful for encouraging a healthy debate. I'm trying to avoid appearing to attach them to you, and trying to use hypothetical examples wherever possible - no offence intended}.

I haven't seen the MC 2.0 course in question, so I cannot comment on it's quality - but it would seem Mr. Kern gets very good feedback.

That aside, there is no doubt that the perceived value of these launches (in terms of revenue) is going through the roof.

Unfortunately, this dangles a huge carrot for everyone else to simply get the quick sale, minimise refunds and then move on to the next launch, the 2.0 version etc. A more short term, 'don't give a s**t' attitude towards the customer and the marketplace. And there is a very noticeable 'follow my leader' attitude in this market, with many of the 'followers' pushing further boundaries - which in turn reflects back (in the customer's mind) on ALL of us.

Just take a little surf around the IMosphere and take note of the huge groundswell of bitterness towards 'ebook sellers', gurus etc. For those of us who aren't currently part of the problem, it's a case of 'if you can't beat 'em, join 'em' or try to become 'part of the solution' - or so it would appear.

Hence why this subject is worth discussing at this point in time, in my opinion.

While we're talking about the ethics of refunding a purchase
made "in error", isn't there also an ethical dimension toSELLING "in error" - to less (or un-) qualified prospects?

I've had a discussion about that prickly subject with Jeff Walker
and Tony Blake around the time of PLF 2.0 launch, and am still
wondering about it now in light of this exchange!

Thoughts?

All success
Dr.Mani

Well people are adults and should be able to decide if it is right for them or not. I didn't purchase the course because it wasn't right for what I am doing. I made a decision not to buy just like those that decided to purchase.

It seems a lot of people here are not giving the buyers responsibility for their actions. As if the sellers are putting a voodoo curse on them to purchase.

Sure their is hype and techniques used to help sales. It didn't work on me so why should we blame that on others. The only thing that matters is the product living up to what was sold. Not about people buying when they couldn't afford it.

It seems a lot of people here are not giving the buyers responsibility for their actions. As if the sellers are putting a voodoo curse on them to purchase.

I think you exaggerate quite a bit here.

Of course they aren't putting any curse on someone, but, but but.

Good salesmansship can evoke emotions in people and make them to do irriational things. Like buying things when they cant afford.

Just give the OP some slack, plzzz.

How do you earn money? , there are prospects out there who easily fall for great marketing and copywriting, specially if the stakes are high and the claims are over the top. Weightloss prodcuts, one example.

Good salesmansship can evoke emotions in people and make them to do irriational things. Like buying things when they cant afford.

Just give the OP some slack, plzzz.

How do you earn money? , there are prospects out there who easily fall for great marketing and copywriting, specially if the stakes are high and the claims are over the top. Weightloss prodcuts, one example.

I'll be back tomorrow. If the discussions are here.

I am not even talking about the OP.

If you are that easily influenced into purchasing things that you cannot afford than life will be very difficult for you.

Good salesmansship can evoke emotions in people and make them to do irriational things. Like buying things when they cant afford.

OMG, did you even think before making such a nonsensical comment? NO ONE makes you do anything. You have a free will and can make rational choices or irrational choices. It is up to you and you alone.

That sounds like something one of my kids would say. "They made me do it." My God, how ridiculous is that? That is part of the lack of personal responsibility that is so prevalent in our society today. There are too many people whining that someone forced them to do something against their will or someone made them mad, etc. I don't care how persuasive Frank Kern, Jeff Walker, John Reese or any other IM marketer is they don't make you push the buy button folks. That one is on you.

How about thinking about all of the ramifications involved before making a purchase huh? Doing your due diligence and deciding on factors which may include the sellers credibility, whether or not the product meets your needs and whether or not you can afford it just to name a few. Then making an educated, logical decision on what is best for you.

OMG, did you even think before making such a nonsensical comment? NO ONE makes you do anything. You have a free will and can make rational choices or irrational choices. It is up to you and you alone.

That sounds like something one of my kids would say. "They made me do it." My God, how ridiculous is that? That is part of the lack of personal responsibility that is so prevalent in our society today. There are too many people whining that someone forced them to do something against their will or someone made them mad, etc. I don't care how persuasive Frank Kern, Jeff Walker, John Reese or any other IM marketer is they don't make you push the buy button folks. That one is on you.

How about thinking about all of the ramifications involved before making a purchase huh? Doing your due diligence and deciding on factors which may include the sellers credibility, whether or not the product meets your needs and whether or not you can afford it just to name a few. Then making an educated, logical decision on what is best for you.

Roger, you've got a way with words that impresses me, and I'm not impressed very often. You are dead on as usual.

I'm still not convinced that she is a satisfied buyer. If she were, she would have been extremely motivated, at least a little bit, to use the course and make some money with it. The fact that she has not taken action yet means that either she is not the type to take action or that the course didn't live up to its billing. I can't make a guess either way, as I'm not in the OP's head, however based on my previous comments I can see why she would not mention if she were unhappy with the course.

Hell, I said I was disappointed and I got told that I was badmouthing Frank. Just imagine if she came on here and said she didn't like the course and wanted to return it. Suddenly you'd have all the "believers" on here bashing her for "not getting it," and she'd be made to look like a fool.

I've gone through MC and it is a good course, but no course should be closed to criticism. However, you have a lot of people that rely on others talking good about the course so that they feel good about purchasing it. It is a cycle of madness that keeps people buying more stuff.

We've thrown dozens of warrior fundraisers here and I'm betting some of the money went to people that made bad decisions, yet no one said anything about it. I'm just astounded by the fact that a no questions asked refund doesn't mean that in the eyes of a marketer...at least some of you.

When I say no questions asked with my products, I mean it. I could care less why you want to refund the product, but I know that I'd rather you be happy than make a few bucks. The customer isn't always right and there will always be people that abuse the system, but that's business! If you can't handle a refund then you are in the wrong business.

We should all consider ourselves fortunate that we can manifest money at will without having to take a shower and put on a suit. Some of you can make more money in a day than some make in a year, yet we fight over a few grand.

We should spend more time focusing on the business of making money rather than wasting our time worrying about refund issues.

If she really was happy with the course, I bet she'd have taken action by now.

The point was NOT that she wanted to return the product - The point was that she wanted to do the respectable thing - and others came on board and tried to talk her into refunding. She did NOT want to refund. If others want to be irresponsible w/ their money and start refunding items when they get in a pinch, then fine. But I wouldn't come to public forums and try to talk others into joining in on your irresponsible behavior. People do read these posts you know?

I'm sure nobody would have this ethics problem if they bought a shirt at Norstroms, lost their job, and then decided to return the shirt later while still observing the refund policy. If someone posted on a message board asking how to sell it, you definitely wouldn't get all these blowhards talking about ethics...you'd have people telling them to return the f-in shirt to nordstroms.

Nope - you'd get the same responses. It all comes down to personal responsibility. The only way a free market works, is if a MAJORITY of people take responsibility for their finances and purchases. If everyone thought the way you do, believe me no one would make any money.

That's right. And that all breaks down when half of that equation renigs on the terms.

When "half of that equation renegs on the terms" it's actionable in civil court in most countries.

Believe me - the no questions asked refund policy only works because a majority of people do not think like you.

It works when the value of the purchase matches a particular need, or set of needs, of the purchaser.

What you've been describing in all of your posts on this topic is a distorted sort of "honour system" in which it's ok to promise something, such as an "iron-clad, no questions asked" refund policy to ease the prospect into a purchase, yet express outright indignation when it comes to delivering on that promise.

That said, I'm sure Kern's product suited the needs and circumstances of the majority of his customers who did not seek a refund for obvious reasons.

Are you actually reading what you write? We're not talking about a buyer initiating a chargeback...we're talking about a refund within the terms.

All refunds are within the terms - for any reason. Which is why it only works when a majority of people honor their payments. If a majority of people were unethical it wouldn't work. Using the product to it's fullest potential, and then refunding it would also fall under these type of "no questions asked" terms. But it would still be unethical.

Obviously our ethics differ, which is why you'll never convince me that financial difficulty, is in itself a good enough reason to refund a product. The personal responsibility I'm talking about is the financial part. The OP never said she didn't like the product. Which is why she didn't want to refund the product. That's the right thing to do. It shouldn't be up to someone selling a product to do a financial background check on every person that buys a product. If you can't afford it, then you take a risk in buying it. If you're living from paycheck to paycheck and buy something that will put you at risk when you buy it, then that's the risk that YOU take.

Could you get the refund? Obviously yes. I'm just thankful that at least at this present moment more than 50% of the people in this world are responsible human beings. However, it seems as though that percentage is shrinking.

It shouldn't be up to someone selling a product to do a financial background check on every person that buys a product. If you can't afford it, then you take a risk in buying it. If you're living from paycheck to paycheck and buy something that will put you at risk when you buy it, then that's the risk that YOU take.

Do you really think that applies in cases where the implication is that you will make far more money than you spent on the product? Why do some of these courses have payment plans?

I think if everyone living paycheck to paycheck actually lived up to this rule, these launches wouldn't do nearly as well, since far fewer people would be able to buy the product.

You have to realize that many people buying high-ticket IM products can't really afford them in the sense that they don't have the cash in their wallet- they put the product on a credit card and pay high interest on it, hoping they'll be able to make money from what they get in the product.

That sure sounds like "irresponsible buyers" doesn't it? Wouldn't it be funny if all those people decided to stop buying these products since they don't have the cash? I can just imagine the panic here.

So I guess it's OK to sell these products, knowing full well many of the buyers can't afford them, yet if one of them realizes that and decides to return the product, that means he is unethical and irresponsible. Funny how that works- the irresponsible ones who don't return the product are not a problem at all. It's like the ethics only kick in when it affects the seller, not the buyer.

I don't take offense at what's being said. I went out on a limb purchasing the product. I thought that I would be able to pay for it with what was promised in the original bonus, but that changed. Things happen, so I just had to figure out how to deal with it, which is why I asked my original question.

I looked up what "OP" means so I could figure out what everyone was calling me--finally found it on Urban Dictionary. I was afraid of the repercussions if I asked here! Note to newbies: OP = Original Poster. I am not dumb, just not yet fully educated in Internet Marketing. I am very willing and able to learn, which is why I bought MC2.

I don't mind asking for a refund if the purchase doesn't meet my needs. I have only asked for two. One was for a program that was not able to do what it said it would, and the other for an online program that promised to deliver certain things but once I got in, I found I knew as much than the person doing the program. Incidentally, I still have not received either refund and I haven't made a stink about it to them. My web host owner tells me I'm just too nice. All of my sites went down last weekend and I didn't call him until Monday morning because I didn't want to interrupt his weekend.

I know I'm weird--and I'm okay with that. If I get too much change I go back and give it to the cashier. A couple of times I've gotten to the car and found things I forgot under the shopping cart--I bring them back into the store to pay for them. I am certainly not perfect, but I believe in being honest. I love to help people and if I didn't need money to live, I would be happy doing things for free. I already do too much of that--I hate to ask people for money! I know, not the makings of a good businessperson.

I have started going through the course. I do not have a list yet to do the Four Day Cash Machine. I do recognize what people are doing when they send me "Thank You" emails now. Core Influence is an awesome video and has helped me to think of things differently already. The other items are great and I have no doubt they will work, but they take time. I have to make my second installment payment to Frank, and I don't have it right now. I've got nine children, four of whom still live at home, and almost four grandchildren. My husband was let go from his job. We've been dealing with a very expensive, cross-country, year-long court battle with my ex-husband. We all have our sob stories--they are situations to deal with, not to be used as excuses. I am fortunate to do virtual assistant website work for a great online janitorial business, but I do want to be able to learn IM so that I can be debt-free and have time to do the things I want to in life. I am a big genealogist--I want to go to Norway and Sweden one day to meet my relatives who live there. See, I told you I was weird--I don't dream of going to Hawaii or surfing in California--I dream of dead people and their kinfolk!

I have been working on things--I have some mini-niche type sites set up. I am learning to drive traffic and build lists. Either I am doing it wrong or it just takes time! . I have also been working on a PHP Link Directory site for my county--started from scratch, not knowing anything. I have a long way to go, but this is what I have so far: http://www.sherburnearea.com. I don't think it's bad for my first attempt. I planned to do this before I ever heard of the "Offline Goldmine" niche. I am teaching my 13- and 15-year old children how to do things that can help. I just received an email from a warrior is has a Filipino assistant I can share. My prospects are very bright and when I have questions, someone here on the forum is able to answer them. That's very cool!

I do want to have a good reputation. I'm not really worried about being put on the blacklist and "not being part of the club." I figured it would be a long time before any gurus would even know who I was. I'm certainly not trying to suck up to them and look good. I've read enough times here on the forum that it takes a long time to build up a good reputation and a short time to destroy it. I think we've seen examples of that just in this thread. I don't know the people here well enough to know who is connected to whom, or is famous, or is a jerk. I see names and read responses without any preconceived notions. I do know that a lot of people have taken time to give answers to my question and I appreciate that.

I knew when I bought my program that I was taking a risk. That was my choice. After reading all of the responses here, I probably could ask for a refund, but I still don't feel like that's the answer. I wish I had a really good WSO that I could offer and just earn the money I need right now. I appreciate Jason's offer of the bonuses, to me and to TimG--they do look very good. And I appreciate the offers to buy the program from me. I am going to let things settle down a bit and then decide what to do.

Thanks again to all, and I'll let you know when my full memoir is out! Hey, would that be a good WSO?!

Terrie

P.S. Since I unexpectedly have obtained the attention of the forum, any gurus may feel free to PM me and say Hi!

Well if nothing else, you're helping to make people who have come to consider their customers as just a number in a paypal receipt, or an email addy in an autoresponder, realise that behind the numbers there is a living, breathing, human being with desires and goals etc. That can't be a bad thing?

OP is actually one of the words that is underlined in the forum with a dotted line, and if you hover over it a little pop-up appears spelling out the meaning of the abbreviation.

I'm pleased you didn't take offence at some of the terms I used in the discussion.

Hi Davebo,

Well done maverick

That old chestnut. The thing is Davebo, when you come blundering into threads heavy-handedly, throwing insults around and condemnations without explanation or any solid basis - you do no-one any favours. If you could just learn to contain yourself and deliver a reasoned contribution to the discussion, you wouldn't leave as much room for 'the other side' to reply in kind - or simply ignore you.

That way they have nowhere to go except to disappear, or explain themselves, or offer some sort of equivalently reasoned counter-position.

All that you do is give them a different and convenient focus, so that they can ignore the questions that demand explanations, and conveniently tar everyone else with the same brush as you. Why not dispense with the sledgehammer and try a nut-cracker?

I think part of the problem does lie with the OP. It seems she has not herself made a decision and is unsure what to do. She herself has admitted to being a bit of a newbie and perhaps has been a bit gullible, brought on by the promise of wealth, which was nurtured via the Kern product launch process. But then again newbies as well as more experienced IMers get sent the same emails and videos.

So Kern himself has evoked this product desire in her and if the motivation has fallen after the sale then such is life. How often does this happen? Like every fricking day a thousand times, all over the world.

I say again, as Kern has offered a hassle free refund for any reason then he will factually have earned more sales because of it. If a percentage end up refunding then that is all factored in anyway.

Now this isn't me advocating a refund in the lady's case.

However, if the lady doesn't want to use the materials or can't use the materials to make herself more money for whatever reason, then she should do what Kern himself suggested and return it for a refund.

It's no good feeling great with oneself and taking the high ground about offering clients a full refund and reaping the benefits of more sales because of this, and then getting upset if someone does take the person up on the refund offer.

1. In DOZENS of threads I've seen in my time on the WF, when a seller starts complaining about some off-the-wall refund request, the overwhelming response is, "just refund and move on - it's a cost of doing business." Why all the hate when looking at the other side?

2. Yes, the OP has ethics. I'd guess that for every person on one fringe or the other throwing insults back and forth at the drop of the hat, there are 50 in the middle who always try to do the right thing - regardless of the personal cost. She should be recognized for being "one of the good guys."

3. I suspect that Jason has a "Frank Kern" Google alert (just commenting on the pattern, not judging). Maybe one for "Jason Moffatt," too. I've just triggered both of them. =D

This is a fascinating debate, not just because of the subject matter (which seems to vary post by post) but also from an observational standpoint - it's like watching a car crash or a fight between a pack of dogs - I believe someone once called it the rubberneck effect, but I forget who.

Is someone able to point me to the website of The International Federation of Internet Marketers so I can look up the 'definition' of Internet Marketing Ethics? I've been looking but I can't seem to find it.

And that's the problem, this argument is about a purely subjective set of guidelines that aren't written down and exist as values and beliefs as unique as the head they reside in.

Whether or not the OP should/could request a refund is not the point. As far as I can recall, no-one has suggested that this is not an option, except for the OP. She doesn't want to because

I don't feel good about returning it

that's how she feels. There's absolutely no arguing with how the lady feels. It would appear that her values are telling her not to return it.

This is a fascinating debate, not just because of the subject matter (which seems to vary post by post) but also from an observational standpoint - it's like watching a car crash or a fight between a pack of dogs - I believe someone once called it the rubberneck effect, but I forget who.

Is someone able to point me to the website of The International Federation of Internet Marketers so I can look up the 'definition' of Internet Marketing Ethics? I've been looking but I can't seem to find it.

And that's the problem, this argument is about a purely subjective set of guidelines that aren't written down and exist as values and beliefs as unique as the head they reside in.

Whether or not the OP should/could request a refund is not the point. As far as I can recall, no-one has suggested that this is not an option, except for the OP. She doesn't want to because that's how she feels. There's absolutely no arguing with how the lady feels. It would appear that her values are telling her not to return it.

Now, if your values don't agree with her - so what?

Argue all you like, ain't going to make a jot of difference.

Peter

But arguing is much more fun

You are right, the debate is subjective, which is what makes it very fascinating to discuss/debate/argue. I thought we were beyond the OP's feelings by now, but I could be wrong.

The point was that people like Jason "Handshake is a deal" mofit, was trying to get across this point that it's unethical to ask for a refund (for any reason) on a product that was sold using a "100% money back guarantee". What you had there was a marketer trying to do a manipulate a buyer who had a right to getting a refund by saying it was unethical.

Mmmm, not wishing to prolong a pointless argument (but fearing I might) point me to the post where Jason said

it's unethical to ask for a refund (for any reason) on a product that was sold using a "100% money back guarantee"

I've just gone through this thread and couldn't see any reference to that.

So please, just say what post number so we can have a clear and just discussion.

Mmmm, not wishing to prolong a pointless argument (but fearing I might) point me to the post where Jason said I've just gone through this thread and couldn't see any reference to that.

So please, just say what post number so we can have a clear and just discussion.

Peter

I don't believe he said that (for any reason)...however he did say getting a refund because you can't afford it is unethical.

We are all entitled to our own opinions here and I think this has been a very educating argument.

I think claims of "now I know who not to do business with" are a little over the top though. There have been many overreactions in this thread, myself included, but it has been a good time. I don't think the debate is over, but it looks like the thread is losing its legs.

Eat drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die. No use crying over spilled milk.

I think claims of "now I know who not to do business with" are a little over the top though.

Not really - I would not want to do business w/ someone and have to wait for months to deposit my money, until that person can decide whether or not they can afford it. Thankfully most people are not like that. So I'm willing to do business w/ anyone, at least once. However I'd be a fool to do business w/ someone who has made it apparent that they may ask for a refund if they later can't budget their money. Who wants to be looking over their shoulder waiting for a refund.

Not really - I would not want to do business w/ someone and have to wait for months to deposit my money, until that person can decide whether or not they can afford it. Thankfully most people are not like that. So I'm willing to do business w/ anyone, at least once. However I'd be a fool to do business w/ someone who has made it apparent that they may ask for a refund if they later can't budget their money. Who wants to be looking over their shoulder waiting for a refund.

If you feel that way, then why would you ever offer a guarantee? More specifically, an insane no questions asked I don't care if you keep the stuff guarantee? The easy way to fix that is don't offer a guarantee.

Again we are back to the point of who a guarantee is supposed to serve. Does it serve the seller so they can capitalize on people that are on the fence, or is it for the buyer that has the chance to test a product and see if it lives up to its price. Better yet, how about it is there for both the buyer and seller to prevent ill will and guilt from either side?

If you feel that way, then why would you ever offer a guarantee? More specifically, an insane no questions asked I don't care if you keep the stuff guarantee? The easy way to fix that is don't offer a guarantee.

Because like I said, a majority of people are not like that, so it makes it viable to offer such a deal. Believe me, once a majority of the world starts thinking like you, the guarantees will be over.

Because like I said, a majority of people are not like that, so it makes it viable to offer such a deal. Believe me, once a majority of the world starts thinking like you, the guarantees will be over.

So you are saying the refund policy is meant to benefit the seller only? Ok then...now I know where you stand.

The way I see it is this...lets say I own a bookstore and someone comes in and starts spending every day in the coffeeshop reading the books to completion. Do I kick them out? Of course not, they obviously need the money more than I do.

What if they take the book home, don't open it, and decide to bring it back...sure, no problem!

What if they take it home, read it, and bring it back untarnished...Might be unethical but I'm still going to offer a refund. I'm certainly not going to publicly accuse them of being unethical.

This is business and all sorts of crazy shit happens. We are squabbling over a few bills here. For every person like the OP, there are probably 10 more that buy the course, copy it, and then send it back. You have to factor refunds in when you do business...it is a loss that should be calculated in the launch process.

I see you have a red light product...I'm guessing it is on clickbank? Ever have to give a refund?

So you are saying the refund policy is meant to benefit the seller only? Ok then...now I know where you stand.

The way I see it is this...lets say I own a bookstore and someone comes in and starts spending every day in the coffeeshop reading the books to completion. Do I kick them out? Of course not, they obviously need the money more than I do.

What if they take the book home, don't open it, and decide to bring it back...sure, no problem!

What if they take it home, read it, and bring it back untarnished...Might be unethical but I'm still going to offer a refund. I'm certainly not going to publicly accuse them of being unethical.

This is business and all sorts of crazy shit happens. We are squabbling over a few bills here. For every person like the OP, there are probably 10 more that buy the course, copy it, and then send it back. You have to factor refunds in when you do business...it is a loss that should be calculated in the launch process.

I see you have a red light product...I'm guessing it is on clickbank? Ever have to give a refund?

- And once again you are getting your own unique meaning out of my post.

No the refund policy is not for the seller. But for "ethical" buyers & sellers. With your lline of thinking, it would make no sense to pay for ANY product that offers a no questions asked guarantee. It wold only make sense to buy it - use it - and then refund it. Because it is after all a "no questions asked" guarantee. Why wouldl anyone in their right mind pay for something when they could get it for free right?

That's where you have to rely on ethics. And like I said before - thankfully most people don't share your sense of ethics.

- And once again you are getting your own unique meaning out of my post.

No the refund policy is not for the seller. But for "ethical" buyers & sellers. With your lline of thinking, it would make no sense to pay for ANY product that offers a no questions asked guarantee. It wold only make sense to buy it - use it - and then refund it. Because it is after all a "no questions asked" guarantee. Why wouldl anyone in their right mind pay for something when they could get it for free right?

That's where you have to rely on ethics. And like I said before - thankfully most people don't share your sense of ethics.

Giving a refund is a way to generate more sales. If everyone took a refund than giving a refund guarantee would be ineffective because you were not making any additional sales or even losing money.

You would think it was a easy concept to know based on this being a marketing forum. Gary I understood what you meant.

- And once again you are getting your own unique meaning out of my post.

No the refund policy is not for the seller. But for "ethical" buyers & sellers. With your lline of thinking, it would make no sense to pay for ANY product that offers a no questions asked guarantee. It wold only make sense to buy it - use it - and then refund it. Because it is after all a "no questions asked" guarantee. Why wouldl anyone in their right mind pay for something when they could get it for free right?

That's where you have to rely on ethics. And like I said before - thankfully most people don't share your sense of ethics.

- And once again you are getting your own unique meaning out of my post.

No the refund policy is not for the seller. But for "ethical" buyers & sellers. With your lline of thinking, it would make no sense to pay for ANY product that offers a no questions asked guarantee. It wold only make sense to buy it - use it - and then refund it. Because it is after all a "no questions asked" guarantee. Why wouldl anyone in their right mind pay for something when they could get it for free right?

That's where you have to rely on ethics. And like I said before - thankfully most people don't share your sense of ethics.

Look, quit trying to throw me under the bus because I disagree with you. This has nothing to do with my ethics, it has to do with what a seller should be used to accepting. I don't believe it is ethical to buy something, use it, and return it...but it happens and as long as you have guarantees people are going to do it!

Take my WSO for example...someone asked me if it would work for their specific needs. I told them to buy it, see if they thought it did (I was positive it would) and if they didn't agree, to ask for a refund. I never hear back after they purchased, so I am assuming they were OK with it.

I'm so interested in pleasing customers, that I developed a product based on the fact that I thought the #1 product in that particular niche was over-hyped and useless to most people. I thought people deserved better.

As a buyer, I never go into a purchase thinking that I'm going to rip off the seller. Some might, but you can't stop that. In the case of the OP, she didn't want a refund...fair enough. However, if she did, why should she be labeled as unethical or a douchebag? I'm not interested in whether she wants a refund, I'm interested in the response she would have received had she chosen to get one.

Different products have different refund policies...take a look at X, who is one of the most crass guys I've seen (as a seller). He offers a cool guarantee, but I wouldn't want to abuse it.

Now look at Kern's video...btw, have you watched it? He's basically said to refund it if you have a single iota of doubt if you should have purchased it. That's where the difference lies.

I think a lot of people are starting to sway away from the original post.

The advice given was to ask for a refund, INSTEAD of selling it on ebay.

I know that was what I advised, since selling stuff on ebay for the price you want is hard enough as it is.
Some ppl are getting to the point where ppl are blatantly blaming others who say ask for a refund if you don't like the product. Or just didn't feel it was for you or what ever.

That certainly was not my point, my point was since there was a refund guarantee, it makes perfect sense to ask for it rather than selling it on ebay and short yourself out on 50% or more of the original price, it makes no logical reasoning to sell yourself short out of pocket when a guarantee like that refund policy is in place.

Originally Posted by Martin Luxton

Back to the car crash

I would interpret is as saying the following:

The lady didn't want a refund. Why are you telling her to refund when it seems to be against her principles?

That certainly was not my point, my point was since there was a refund guarantee, it makes perfect sense to ask for it rather than selling it on ebay and short yourself out on 50% or more of the original price, it makes no logical reasoning to sell yourself short out of pocket when a guarantee like that refund policy is in place.

And no one has suggested that she shouldn't get a refund. Also--it hasn't even been implied that it would be unethical to do so.

More than anything--there has been an appreciation of the OP's reasoning for not taking Frank Kern up on his refund policy.

Of course--Mass Control has a 100% no questions asked money back guarantee--everyone here that is utilizing .1% of their brain--understands that.

In fact, one of the many incentives for buying Mass Control, was the money back guarantee.

However, the OP felt that it wouldn't be 'right'(which is another word for 'ethical') for her to refund a course that she found value in--just because, in hindsight, she realized that she couldn't afford it.

The lack of understanding and comprehension in this thread, by some, is unsettling--and borderline sad.

The craziest shit about this debate, is that--just like any argument--one side actually believes that they are making more sense than the other.

And no one has suggested that she shouldn't get a refund. Also--it hasn't even been implied that it would be unethical to do so.

what's the bloody difference? if would help if people read the bloom'n thread / initial posts before starting a war.

Originally Posted by marcanthony

More than anything--there has been an appreciation of the OP's reasoning for not taking Frank Kern up on his refund policy.

really, then you need to go back and read the posts again, nothing but implying how it was unethical to ask for a refund.

and why should there be reasoning for her to lose approx 50% on the money if she sold it on ebay... sheesh, come on... that's not exactly I would call fair.

If your wife said she was going to put it on ebay and would foreknown she wouldn't get $2k for it, and she wasn't working, and you were the one providing the bread and butter, you'd jump to the chance to take up the refund policy that is in place.

Originally Posted by marcanthony

The lack of understanding and comprehension in this thread, by some, is unsettling--and borderline sad.

And no one has suggested that she shouldn't get a refund. Also--it hasn't even been implied that it would be unethical to do so.

More than anything--there has been an appreciation of the OP's reasoning for not taking Frank Kern up on his refund policy.

Of course--Mass Control has a 100% no questions asked money back guarantee--everyone here that is utilizing .1% of their brain--understands that.

In fact, one of the many incentives for buying Mass Control, was the money back guarantee.

However, the OP felt that it wouldn't be 'right'(which is another word for 'ethical') for her to refund a course that she found value in--just because, in hindsight, she realized that she couldn't afford it.

The lack of understanding and comprehension in this thread, by some, is unsettling--and borderline sad.

The craziest shit about this debate, is that--just like any argument--one side actually believes that they are making more sense than the other.

Since we're starting this up again...I'm going to fix a few points for you:

#1 It has been implied by almost half of the people in the thread that returning it would be unethical and downright terrible.

So, who's down? Let's see how tough you are and if you would say in person what you say on here while sitting safe behind your computer

I'd click that link to learn more but I'm not in the mood for possibly getting rick rolled.

But hey, pay for my expenses and I'll go. Be sure to invite a few specific sellers that I would love to meet. I'll send you the list if it's a deal and reimburse you after I terrorize them into paying me. Are samurai swords allowed on planes?

I'd click that link to learn more but I'm not in the mood for possibly getting rick rolled.

But hey, pay for my expenses and I'll go. Be sure to invite a few specific sellers that I would love to meet. I'll send you the list if it's a deal and reimburse you after I terrorize them into paying me. Are samurai swords allowed on planes?

Nathan, I don't take these arguments personally. I am sure we all (but davebo ) would have a few beers and laugh about it.

We all don't have to agree on this. Ethics and responsibility is a personal thing. We will never agree on this stuff.

Cheers,

I don't either, and although they are fun...when the day is over it is important to remember that there's more to life than money. A drink does sound good doesn't it? Maybe that's why I'm so agitated...I haven't had one in nearly 7 months!

I don't either, and although they are fun...when the day is over it is important to remember that there's more to life than money. A drink does sound good doesn't it? Maybe that's why I'm so agitated...I haven't had one in nearly 7 months!

Are you protecting your on line business? If you have a website, blog, ecommerce store you NEED to back it up regularly. Your webhost will only protect you so much. Check out Quirkel. Protect yourself.